President, Patbausi Satra Sammittee, Patbausi, Barpeta v. The State of Assam

represented by Sri Ajit Bora S/o Late Sada Nanda Bora, PO Patbausi, PS Patbausi Dist Barpeta,Assam. By Advocates: Mr. H Thakuria, Mrs. J Kalita,Advs. Respondents: 1. The State of Assam, represented by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Department of Social Welfare, Dispur, Guwahati -6.

2. Sarumataria, Guwahati-6. The Director, Welfare of Schedule Caste, Assam,

3. Barpeta, District Barpeta. The Deputy Commissioner,

4. The Sub-Divisional Welfare Officer, Barpeta, Dist. Barpeta.

5. Development Board, Barpeta, The Chairman, Sub-Divisional Schedule Caste Dist. Barpeta.

6. The Secretary, Construction Committee, S.C. Community Hall, Namakha Rakhal Samaj (Patbausi,Barpeta) By Advocates: Mr. B Choudhury, GA. Mr. S Kataki for R-6. Date of hearing & Judgment : 20th January,2009 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K.MUSAHARY JUDGMENT AND ORDER(ORAL) Heard Mr. H Thakuria, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also h eard Mr. B Choudhury, learned Govt. Advocate for official respondents and also M r. S Kataki, learned counsel for Respondent No.6.

2. In this writ petition it is contended that the President and Sec retary of the Sri Sri Damodar Dev Patbausi Satra Committee made an application b efore the Director, Welfare of Schedule Caste, Assam, Sarumataria, Guwahati-6 (R espondent No.2) on 15.12.2006 praying for sanction of fund for construction of C ommunity Hall at Patbausi Satra in the name of Mahapurusha Sri Sri Damodar Dev. The estimation of Rs.5 lakhs for construction of the Community Hall was forwarde d to the Government for sanction, but surprisingly, according to the petitioner, the Respondent No.2 has issued the impugned letter dated 13.5.2008 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) asking the Sub-Divisional Welfare Officer, Barpeta to hand over the bank draft to the President/Secretary, Construction Committee of SC Co mmunity Hall, Namakha Rakhal Zamaz, Patbausi, Barpeta depriving the petitioner-c ommittee. It is alleged by the petitioner that the Respondent No.6, in whose fav our the Respondent No.2 has issued the aforesaid letter, made false representati on by manipulating certain documents. It is, therefore, submitted by Mr. Thakuri a, learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned letter dated 13.5.2008 s hould be cancelled.

3. Representing the Private Respondent No.6, Mr. S Kataki, learned counsel submits that the Private Respondent No.6 duly approached the authorities concerned and obtained the necessary sanction in his favour from the Government vide letter dated 10th October, 2007, by which, an amount of Rs.5 lakhs was san ctioned in favour of Respondent No.6. It is in pursuance of this sanction letter , the Respondent No.2 vide letter dated 13.5.2008 directed the Sub-Divisional We lfare Officer, Barpeta to hand over the bank draft to the Respondent No.6. The p etitioner did not challenge the original sanction order dated 10.10.2007 and unl ess the aforesaid sanction order is challenged, no order can be passed by this C ourt canceling the letter dated 13.5.2008. In this regard, Mr. Kataki, learned c ounsel for the Respondent No.6 has drawn the attention of this Court to the aver ments made in paragraph 4 of the affidavit in opposition filed by the Respondent No.2 and the same is quoted herein below for better appreciation of the facts o f the case:- (cid:28)That as regards the statements made in paragraph 2 the deponent begs to state t hat a proposal along with Plan and Estimate for construction of SC Community Hal l for Rs.5.00 lac at Patbousi Namakha Rakhal Samaj was received from the Sub-Div isional Welfare Officer, Barpeta vide No.SWB/INF/15/2001/43/275 dtd. 3.8.07. The proposal was approved by the Chairman, SC Dev. Board, Barpeta and recommended b y the Sub-Divisional Welfare Officer, Barpeta dtd. 3.8.07. After receipt of the plan & Estimate this Directorate submitted the formal proposal for total 4 Nos. of Community halls and one SC hostel to the Govt. vide No.DSC/Inf/CSS/2004/Pt-I/ 84 dtd. 10.08.07 for sanction of total Rs.23.00 lacs. The actual name of SC Comm unity hall, patbousi, Barpeta was mentioned as Patbausi Namakha Rakhal Samaj at Sl.4. This Directorate has not submitted any proposal for construction of SC Com munity hall at Sri Sri Damodar Dev Satra Patbausi. The Govt. sanction was received vide No.TAD/BC/119/07/53 dtd. 10.10.07. After re ceipt of sanction this Directorate has released the amount of Rs.5.00 lacs vide Bank Draft No.400626 dtd. 12.1.08 to Sub-Divisional Welfare Officer, Barpeta vid e No.DSC/INF/CSS/606/04/Pt-1 dtd. 6/2/2008. A complaint was received on 27.2.08 from the office bearers of Sri Sri Damodar D ev. Satra Patbausi requesting not to release the fund of Rs.5.00 lacs to Namakha Rakhal Samaj till completion of enquiry. On receipt of the complaint this Direc torate asked the Sub-Divisional Welfare Officer, Barpeta not to disburse the fun d to the Namakha Rakhal Samak until further order and asked to furnish the origi nal proposal sent by the Sub-divisional Welfare Officer, Barpeta along with the detail enquiry report vide DSC/Inf/CSS/606/2004/Pt-I/114 dtd. 27.2.08. The Sub-Divisional Welfare Officer, Barpeta submitted the enquiry report vide No .SWB/Inf/15/2001/141 dtd. 6.5.08 In the enquiry report the Sub-Divisional Welfar e Officer, Barpeta furnished view after examining all points that the SC Communi ty hall should be constructed at Namakha Rakhal Samaj as the SC population at Na makha Rakhal Samaj is more than at Patbausi Satra. After going through the enquiry report submitted by the Sub-Divisional Welfare O fficer, Barpeta this Directorate has asked the Sub-Divisional Welfare Officer, B arpeta to hand over the Bank Draft (earlier released) to the Namakha Rakhal Sama j Patbausi, Barpeta vide No.DSC/Inf/CSS/606/04/Pt-1/124 dtd. 13.5.08. This Direc torate has not modified my prior sanction order as alleged by the petitioner. Th is Directorate acted on the proposal approved by the Chairman SC Dev. Board, Bar peta which was forwarded by the Sub-Divisional Welfare Officer, Barpeta. So, thi s is no question of illegality. (cid:29) The specific averment made in the aforesaid affidavit is that the Respondent No. 2 did not submit any proposal to the Government for construction of SC Community Hall at Patbausi in the name of Sri Sri Damodar Dev.

4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel fo r the parties. It is a matter of discretion of the Government in the matter of p roviding financial aid to the social institutions and the Government with their own wisdom has sanctioned the aforesaid amount in favour of the Respondent No.6. There is no vested right for any party or Social Institutions to claim financia l aid as a matter of right. The position is same with the Petitioner Committee a nd it has no right to challenge the financial aid accorded by the Government to the Social Institutions like the Respondent No.6. The petitioner although made s erious allegation of manipulation of record and overwriting on certain Governmen t correspondences/orders, it did not file any complaint before the police or app ropriate authority. The allegation made by the petitioner cannot be taken into c onsideration in this matter.

5. It is submitted by Mr. S Kataki, learned counsel for the Respond ent No.6 that due to interim order passed by this Court on 23.5.2008, the Respon dent No.6 could not draw the balance amount of Rs.2.50 lakhs and it could not co mplete the construction.

6. In my considered view, the petitioner is not successful in makin g out any case for interference in the matter of providing financial aid to the Respondent No.6 and as such, I have no hesitation to dismiss this writ petition being devoid of merit. The interim order passed on 23.5.2008 stands vacated. The Respondents are at liberty to release the balance amount to the Respondent No.6 .

7. With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.